"Cheaper" could also include "with lower taxes". This could be the case of iPhones built in the new Brazilian Foxcom facilities in Sao Paulo and sold internally in Brazil and South America without the typical high import taxes added in these markets to any foreign-built tech device.
Apple management needs to quell FUD rumors right away. Apple ought to have some sort of media team to collect FUD made up about Apple and then every so often have management come out and correct whatever stupid rumors are circulating.
That doesn't work:
1. It's virtually impossible for Apple to track down every rumor.
2. It simply encourages the "let's throw lots of crap at the wall and see what sticks" mentality of many of these rumormongers. If Apple is going to correct the stuff that's wrong, why not make up a million crazy stories and see which ones Apple doesn't deny.
3. There would be a major thrust to post "Apple didn't deny it, so it must be true" stories. Essentially, Apple would be forced into a position where they'd have to catch ALL rumors and deny them - which brings us back to #1.
The best response is to just ignore them and hope that people eventually get tired of reading rumors from people who are never right. Unfortunately, the latter hasn't happened yet.
I really hate these stories that are always put out claiming informed anonymous tipsters are giving this information. Anyone can be an anonymous tipster with no inside information at all. No one really needs to know what Apple is doing except Apple. There are too many media outlets that are just sheep following the rest of the herd. Unfortunately, individual bloggers can be held responsible for whatever lies they spread.
I'm assuming that you mean "individual bloggers can NOT be held responsible" which is much closer to the truth. While it is theoretically possible to prosecute someone for knowingly posting false information (particularly if they do so to manipulate the stock price), that's nearly impossible to prove and generally not wasting effort on.
Apples sale of low priced iPhone 4 and 4S will need to be terminated soon
Apple need all products to use new lightning interface
So the introduction of a new (lightning based) low priced iPhone will happen
(same applies to iPad 2 and 3 - btw)
Wow. This is one of the most informative posts I've read in a while. You make an excellent point. I'd be willing to bet you're right and the rumors of a cheap iPhone are just the iPhone 4 with a lightning port. Now that you have said it, it seems so obvious.
Apples sale of low priced iPhone 4 and 4S will need to be terminated soon
Apple need all products to use new lightning interface
So the introduction of a new (lightning based) low priced iPhone will happen
(same applies to iPad 2 and 3 - btw)
Maybe they will make a hybrid....a 4S Lightning. This is the only logical idea I've read on why Apple may make a different phone. They are hugely invested in the idea of promoting the Lightning connector.
Maybe they will make a hybrid....a 4S Lightning. This is the only logical idea I've read on why Apple may make a different phone. They are hugely invested in the idea of promoting the Lightning connector.
Apple just added a lightnng connector to the 3rd generation iPad without changing anything else. There's no reason to think they couldn't do this to the iPhone 4S as is.
I don't know what compelling new feature Apple has up its sleeve for the next generation iPhone, but if history is any guide, it'll be more like the iPhone 5S and won't blow anybody's socks off.
That means there won't be much to distinguish the mid-priced phone from the top of the line phone, after the 4S moves down to the low-priced phone, except the screen.
It's hard for me to believe Apple would just move last year's model down a peg and charge $100 less for the iPhone 5 when there's likely to not be a significant difference between it and its successor. People will mostly save the $100 and keep buying the 5.
Wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to redesign the 4S with a lightning connector, use the 5's LTE internals, and let the smaller screen differentiate it in the marketplace, justifying the $100 discount? That way they wouldn't have to touch the 4S at all. Just let it sell out without any further investment, the $0 price tag justified by no true LTE, and lack of lightning. Why would Apple spend money to offer a free phone with lightning that would allow a customer to wait even longer to upgrade to the next? I expect many third party manufacturers are looking to get out of the 30-pin dock connector business as soon as practical. Plus Apple gets to sell them $30/adapter if they want to keep using it with lightning only technology. The need for Apple to implement Iightning doesn't seem critical enough to spend money on a loss-leader product.
At this point, actually building a "budget" model specifically to sell as a mid-priced and low-priced phone makes more sense than continuing to drop the latest model down the ranks. The 3GS/4/4S made some sense but now that they've gone to the unibody construction, not so much. Not only that but everybody doesn't want a larger phone. So Apple builds a smaller phone they can sell for less without canibalizing sales of the larger flagship phone. They limit the build options and sell the less expensive phone for free. They're all unibody, so a few minor tweaks for size to the latest designs, and they're all built on the same equipment, no need to maintain three completely different manufacturing systems.
Apple just added a lightnng connector to the 3rd generation iPad without changing anything else.
*BZZZZZZZZZZZT*
I don't know what compelling new feature Apple has up its sleeve for the iPhone 6, but if history is any guide, it'll be more like the iPhone 5S and won't blow anybody's socks off.
Clarify, please: do you mean the next phone (iPhone 5S, the 7th model) or the actual iPhone 6 (iPhone 6, the 8th model)?
It's hard for me to believe Apple would just move last year's model down a peg and charge $100 less for the iPhone 5 when there's likely to not be a significant difference between it and its successor.
Hard for you to believe something they've done every year for the past five years?
Wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to redesign the 4S…
No. Don't even need to quote the rest.
That way they wouldn't have to touch the 4S at all.
You JUST SAID "redesign it"!
Why would Apple spend money to offer a free phone with lightning that would allow a customer to wait even longer to upgrade to the next?
Why would Apple spend money to do a second branching "update" off of a two year old model?! They said this two years ago, too: "Oh, the iPhone 3GS isn't actually going away; it'll just be updated with an A4. The iPhone 4, now THAT'S going away." Come on!
A quick side question: I don't know that I've spent any time reading CultofMac stories till you pointed me to one. Are they usually so blunt and to-the-point about Apple, for example their opinion piece "Why Apple should stop making iOS apps" story? A quick perusal kinda leaves that impression.
I'm not really a fan of the site to be honest. A little too much click bait for my liking. The piece you reference is a perfect example. it was written by Mike Elgan. Just the fact he writes for them is enough for me not to like the site.
Yes I know they changed the processor and front camera as well on the iPad (4g). Whoopdi do. Are there technical limitations that otherwise prohibit easily updating the 4S with lightning? If you know this for a fact I'd love to know about it?
I meant the next generation iPhone, not the 6 since we don't know what they may call it.
Hard for me to believe now that the iPhone 5 and next gen iPhone are not likely going to be more identical than not. There has always been a significant difference between the 3GS, 4, 4/S and 5. Now that the iPhone 5 has 4G LTE and a larger screen, not to mention industry standard cameras, etc. what are they going to add? A faster processor? And? How does that justify a $100 price bump for the average consumer? Especially when the 5 screams as is. And I don't see this changing much over the next few years, unless there's some new worldwide standard after LTE that's going to rolled-out in 2 years ... We'll be lucky if LTE is fully implemented by then.
I meant the current 4S spot. The mid-priced spot. You know this whole labeling system of Apple's makes it hard to discuss, as evidenced by your reference to it.
And I never said update a two year old model. Where did you get that? The whole thrust of my argument is that Apple would redesign the mid-priced model currently occupied by the 4S, and based on the 5. My argument specifically was to leave the 4S alone and move it down to the bottom rung, no need to even add lighting.
If Apple can't keep improving major areas of the device, 5G/Mega Data/BlaBlaTechnobabble, then what is to distinguish the top of the line model from the bottom two tiers? Yes they can add faster Bluetooth, better wifi, faster processors,better cameras, limit features in iOS. But is that enough to differentiate models? Suddenly Apple is competing with itself on the exact same playing field as google and Microsoft -- specs, not only that but marginal specs. A simple difference in screen size clearly differentiates the phone in the marketplace and gives consumers a clear choice, further limited by memory size on the low end. I would go so far as to say that the low end (free) model would then go on to be last years model of the mid-priced model while always maintaining the flagship model in a design category of its own.
Yes I know they changed the processor and front camera as well on the iPad (4g). Whoopdi do.
Sorry, no. You don't get to write off a complete update to the device.
Hard for me to believe now that the iPhone 5 and next gen iPhone are not likely going to be more identical than not.
They do tick-tock designs. Pretty sure the outside case would stay the same, but don't pretend the hardware will.
what are they going to add?
This is why you're not at Apple. They'll come up with something we never knew we needed. I can think of a few things that I never knew I needed (well, you know), but I'm not at Apple either…
A faster processor? And? How does that justify a $100 price bump for the average consumer?
It has justified it for every single iPhone model since the 3G, so… It goes without saying that you're ignoring the part where, by design, it's a two year upgrade cycle. There will be justification for model to model updates, but there's always more for when your contract runs out.
I meant the current 4S spot. The mid-priced spot.
Apple's gonna keep the 4S as-is, dropped to $0. The iPhone 5 will be dropped to $99, and the 5S will take its place. Seems pretty simple a plan, given that they've done it for years now.
They had a chance to give the entire line Lightning. They didn't do it. They didn't do it with the iPad, even. They're not going to do it now, with the phone being even older. It's just gonna run its course.
Apple didn't do spot updates to their old models, giving them USB, when the iMac was introduced. They didn't do spur updates to their old models, giving them Thunderbolt, when the first Thunderbolt Macs were introduced, either. They just ran their course.
And I never said update a two year old model. Where did you get that?
From here, I guess?
Wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to redesign the 4S with a lightning connector…
The whole thrust of my argument is that Apple would redesign the mid-priced model currently occupied by the 4S, and based on the 5.
Okay, so… why can't that just BE the iPhone 5? They just got over this move to a larger screen; you're saying keep 66% small screen models instead of moving to 66% larger screen models?
Apple probably doesn't give a hoot about the rumours. It keeps the brand in the news --- free advertising, and doesn't give anything away. In fact it wouldn't surprise me that they might "seed" the mill with intentional "leaks".
It has justified it for every single iPhone model since the 3G, so… It goes without saying that you're ignoring the part where, by design, it's a two year upgrade cycle. There will be justification for model to model updates, but there's always more for when your contract runs out.
Processor upgrades may well justify a new phone for some. It doesn't for me and many others, including critics who review each update. But more to the point you are overlooking the SIGNIFICANT differences between the previous models and the future situation:
3G: added 3G
3GS: Added much faster processor than 3G (which was the same processor as the original iPhone)
4: added Retina Display, camera flash and significantly faster processor
4S: added pseudo 4G
5: added true 4G LTE and a 4" retina display plus lightning
So where's the compelling reason to buy the next gen phone, rather than the then mid-priced 5?
I will be due for another upgrade by then, and a processor upgrade won't do it. Better cameras? The 5 is already state of the art. NFC? Where would I use it? No I don't work at Apple, and I'm sure they will come up with something I can't possibly imagine, the question is whether I will NEED it with the major features unchanged.
Now the then bottom tier 4S, I understand. It doesn't have true 4G LTE. It also has a smaller screen and a slower processor, and no lightning. And they're going to sell me that for free. But the 5 and the next gen flagship, will be mostly identical. What could possibly justify $100 difference? A faster processor? Doubtful for most at the speeds the processors currently run (it was much more of an issue between the 3G & 3GS).
Then we get to the next update, two generations out. The 5 sits on the bottom rung, the mostly identical successor in the mid-price, the latest generation on top. They all have 4G LTE (I doubt there will be a new cellular standard being implemented by then). They all have 16:9 4" retina displays. They all have top of the line cameras. They all have lightning. The only significant differences are going to be processors. Maybe the flagship has a modified design. And some will pay for that alone. But unlike most past generations, the processor is about the only major thing that sets them apart in the future.
But wouldn't it make more sense to have two distinct models? A mini that justifies the lower cost, and the flagship that at least gives you more screen space for the money as well as the latest bells and whistles? The "mini" then becomes the iPhone that gets last years model bumped down to the low-end free position, while the updated mini stays in the mid-range, clearly distinguishable from the flagship. Apple doesn't have to push the style envelope on this model either, with fewer "revolutionary" updates, allowing them to focus on keeping the flagship model unique and highly desirable.
Processor upgrades may well justify a new phone for some. It doesn't for me and many others, including critics who review each update.
You're joking, right?
3G: added 3G
3GS: Added much faster processor than 3G (which was the same processor as the original iPhone)
4: added Retina Display, camera flash and significantly faster processor
4S: added pseudo 4G
5: added true 4G LTE and a 4" retina display plus lightning
So how is this a "valid update" under your system? Notice the 4S also updated every single other hardware aspect of the phone, but you've glossed over that. It had a significantly faster processor, as did the iPhone 5, but you glossed over that, too.
So where's the compelling reason to buy the next gen phone, rather than the then mid-priced 5?
So don't buy it. Pretend whatever you want to pretend, but you're just outright wrong. This is how hardware updates work, and always have, with computing devices. Where's the compelling reason to buy any computer model except the very first with a new case design? That's basically your argument, and it shows a lot about why it's faulty.
But the 5 and the next gen flagship, will be mostly identical.
They'll be "mostly identical" in the same way the iPhone 4 and 4S were "mostly identical": in that they're not at all identical.
What could possibly justify $100 difference?
What justified it between the 4 and 4S? The 3 and 3GS?
(I doubt there will be a new cellular standard being implemented by then)
No, but there will be faster LTE chips. There will be faster LTE for the next iPhone LTE-A tops out at, what was it, 100 MBps? That's a capital B. No idea if it's right; but something like that.
But unlike most past generations, the processor is about the only major thing that sets them apart in the future.
Really? You can't think of anything at all that would… *sigh* Never mind.
But wouldn't it make more sense to have two distinct models?
Only if they have identical hardware, but that doesn't seem to be Apple's game.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - In a revised version of an interview published Thursday in a Chinese newspaper, Apple Inc marketing chief Phil Schiller said the company would focus on making "the best products" for customers and "never blindly pursue market share."
On Thursday, the Shanghai Evening News cited Schiller as saying that Apple would not develop a cheaper smartphone for the sake of expanding its market share.
That appeared to undermine other recent media reports indicating that Apple was working on a low-end smartphone, which would represent a significant shift in strategy for a company that has always focused on premium products.
But in a new version of the story published after the original, the Shanghai Evening News removed all references to cheaper smartphones, except for a mention of a "cheaper, low-end product." It also amended its original headline from "Apple will not push a cheaper smartphone for the sake of market share," to "Apple wants to provide the best products, will not blindly pursue market share."
Apple confirmed the interview had taken place and that it had contacted the Chinese newspaper about amending its original article, but had no further comment and declined to provide a transcript of the interview.
It was not clear if Schiller had made his original comments or if the newspaper had quoted him out of context.
The Shanghai Evening News could not be immediately reached for comment around 2:00 a.m. Shanghai time Saturday.
"We will not discuss plans for any future products," Schiller was cited as saying in a newly published quote.
The executive had originally been quoted as saying that developing a cheaper smartphone to try and replace feature phones was not a direction in which the company wanted to head. That comment was removed from the new version of the story, which now cites Schiller as saying, "Apple has always focused on providing the best products for its consumers, we've never blindly chased market share."
Apple rarely addresses rumors about upcoming products, which often spur intense speculation. Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal cited anonymous sources as saying Apple could release a cheaper iPhone as early as this year.
(Reporting by Edwin Chan; Editing by Bernadette Baum)
Comments
This could be the case of iPhones built in the new Brazilian Foxcom facilities in Sao Paulo and sold internally in Brazil and South America without the typical high import taxes added in these markets to any foreign-built tech device.
Apples sale of low priced iPhone 4 and 4S will need to be terminated soon
Apple need all products to use new lightning interface
So the introduction of a new (lightning based) low priced iPhone will happen
(same applies to iPad 2 and 3 - btw)
That doesn't work:
1. It's virtually impossible for Apple to track down every rumor.
2. It simply encourages the "let's throw lots of crap at the wall and see what sticks" mentality of many of these rumormongers. If Apple is going to correct the stuff that's wrong, why not make up a million crazy stories and see which ones Apple doesn't deny.
3. There would be a major thrust to post "Apple didn't deny it, so it must be true" stories. Essentially, Apple would be forced into a position where they'd have to catch ALL rumors and deny them - which brings us back to #1.
The best response is to just ignore them and hope that people eventually get tired of reading rumors from people who are never right. Unfortunately, the latter hasn't happened yet.
I'm assuming that you mean "individual bloggers can NOT be held responsible" which is much closer to the truth. While it is theoretically possible to prosecute someone for knowingly posting false information (particularly if they do so to manipulate the stock price), that's nearly impossible to prove and generally not wasting effort on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grmphf
Apples sale of low priced iPhone 4 and 4S will need to be terminated soon
Apple need all products to use new lightning interface
So the introduction of a new (lightning based) low priced iPhone will happen
(same applies to iPad 2 and 3 - btw)
Wow. This is one of the most informative posts I've read in a while. You make an excellent point. I'd be willing to bet you're right and the rumors of a cheap iPhone are just the iPhone 4 with a lightning port. Now that you have said it, it seems so obvious.
The purchase of any phone requires one to spend tens of hundreds of dollars. The story was bs.
This story is the first thing that makes me even consider that the original story had any merit whatsoever.
But I still think its BS
Butbutbutbutbutbutbutbut…
"Apple WILL (must/has to) make a cheaper phone! You're all idiots for thinking otherwise! Remember the iPad mini"
Ugh, can't find the exact quote:
I consider myself successful for the things I've said "No" to more than the things I've said "Yes".
Something like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grmphf
Apples sale of low priced iPhone 4 and 4S will need to be terminated soon
Apple need all products to use new lightning interface
So the introduction of a new (lightning based) low priced iPhone will happen
(same applies to iPad 2 and 3 - btw)
Maybe they will make a hybrid....a 4S Lightning. This is the only logical idea I've read on why Apple may make a different phone. They are hugely invested in the idea of promoting the Lightning connector.
I don't know what compelling new feature Apple has up its sleeve for the next generation iPhone, but if history is any guide, it'll be more like the iPhone 5S and won't blow anybody's socks off.
That means there won't be much to distinguish the mid-priced phone from the top of the line phone, after the 4S moves down to the low-priced phone, except the screen.
It's hard for me to believe Apple would just move last year's model down a peg and charge $100 less for the iPhone 5 when there's likely to not be a significant difference between it and its successor. People will mostly save the $100 and keep buying the 5.
Wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to redesign the 4S with a lightning connector, use the 5's LTE internals, and let the smaller screen differentiate it in the marketplace, justifying the $100 discount? That way they wouldn't have to touch the 4S at all. Just let it sell out without any further investment, the $0 price tag justified by no true LTE, and lack of lightning. Why would Apple spend money to offer a free phone with lightning that would allow a customer to wait even longer to upgrade to the next? I expect many third party manufacturers are looking to get out of the 30-pin dock connector business as soon as practical. Plus Apple gets to sell them $30/adapter if they want to keep using it with lightning only technology. The need for Apple to implement Iightning doesn't seem critical enough to spend money on a loss-leader product.
At this point, actually building a "budget" model specifically to sell as a mid-priced and low-priced phone makes more sense than continuing to drop the latest model down the ranks. The 3GS/4/4S made some sense but now that they've gone to the unibody construction, not so much. Not only that but everybody doesn't want a larger phone. So Apple builds a smaller phone they can sell for less without canibalizing sales of the larger flagship phone. They limit the build options and sell the less expensive phone for free. They're all unibody, so a few minor tweaks for size to the latest designs, and they're all built on the same equipment, no need to maintain three completely different manufacturing systems.
Originally Posted by Mac_128
Apple just added a lightnng connector to the 3rd generation iPad without changing anything else.
*BZZZZZZZZZZZT*
I don't know what compelling new feature Apple has up its sleeve for the iPhone 6, but if history is any guide, it'll be more like the iPhone 5S and won't blow anybody's socks off.
Clarify, please: do you mean the next phone (iPhone 5S, the 7th model) or the actual iPhone 6 (iPhone 6, the 8th model)?
It's hard for me to believe Apple would just move last year's model down a peg and charge $100 less for the iPhone 5 when there's likely to not be a significant difference between it and its successor.
Hard for you to believe something they've done every year for the past five years?
Wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to redesign the 4S…
No. Don't even need to quote the rest.
That way they wouldn't have to touch the 4S at all.
You JUST SAID "redesign it"!
Why would Apple spend money to offer a free phone with lightning that would allow a customer to wait even longer to upgrade to the next?
Why would Apple spend money to do a second branching "update" off of a two year old model?! They said this two years ago, too: "Oh, the iPhone 3GS isn't actually going away; it'll just be updated with an A4. The iPhone 4, now THAT'S going away." Come on!
Yes I know they changed the processor and front camera as well on the iPad (4g). Whoopdi do. Are there technical limitations that otherwise prohibit easily updating the 4S with lightning? If you know this for a fact I'd love to know about it?
I meant the next generation iPhone, not the 6 since we don't know what they may call it.
Hard for me to believe now that the iPhone 5 and next gen iPhone are not likely going to be more identical than not. There has always been a significant difference between the 3GS, 4, 4/S and 5. Now that the iPhone 5 has 4G LTE and a larger screen, not to mention industry standard cameras, etc. what are they going to add? A faster processor? And? How does that justify a $100 price bump for the average consumer? Especially when the 5 screams as is. And I don't see this changing much over the next few years, unless there's some new worldwide standard after LTE that's going to rolled-out in 2 years ... We'll be lucky if LTE is fully implemented by then.
I meant the current 4S spot. The mid-priced spot. You know this whole labeling system of Apple's makes it hard to discuss, as evidenced by your reference to it.
And I never said update a two year old model. Where did you get that? The whole thrust of my argument is that Apple would redesign the mid-priced model currently occupied by the 4S, and based on the 5. My argument specifically was to leave the 4S alone and move it down to the bottom rung, no need to even add lighting.
If Apple can't keep improving major areas of the device, 5G/Mega Data/BlaBlaTechnobabble, then what is to distinguish the top of the line model from the bottom two tiers? Yes they can add faster Bluetooth, better wifi, faster processors,better cameras, limit features in iOS. But is that enough to differentiate models? Suddenly Apple is competing with itself on the exact same playing field as google and Microsoft -- specs, not only that but marginal specs. A simple difference in screen size clearly differentiates the phone in the marketplace and gives consumers a clear choice, further limited by memory size on the low end. I would go so far as to say that the low end (free) model would then go on to be last years model of the mid-priced model while always maintaining the flagship model in a design category of its own.
Originally Posted by Mac_128
Yes I know they changed the processor and front camera as well on the iPad (4g). Whoopdi do.
Sorry, no. You don't get to write off a complete update to the device.
Hard for me to believe now that the iPhone 5 and next gen iPhone are not likely going to be more identical than not.
They do tick-tock designs. Pretty sure the outside case would stay the same, but don't pretend the hardware will.
what are they going to add?
This is why you're not at Apple. They'll come up with something we never knew we needed. I can think of a few things that I never knew I needed (well, you know), but I'm not at Apple either…
A faster processor? And? How does that justify a $100 price bump for the average consumer?
It has justified it for every single iPhone model since the 3G, so… It goes without saying that you're ignoring the part where, by design, it's a two year upgrade cycle. There will be justification for model to model updates, but there's always more for when your contract runs out.
I meant the current 4S spot. The mid-priced spot.
Apple's gonna keep the 4S as-is, dropped to $0. The iPhone 5 will be dropped to $99, and the 5S will take its place. Seems pretty simple a plan, given that they've done it for years now.
They had a chance to give the entire line Lightning. They didn't do it. They didn't do it with the iPad, even. They're not going to do it now, with the phone being even older. It's just gonna run its course.
Apple didn't do spot updates to their old models, giving them USB, when the iMac was introduced. They didn't do spur updates to their old models, giving them Thunderbolt, when the first Thunderbolt Macs were introduced, either. They just ran their course.
And I never said update a two year old model. Where did you get that?
From here, I guess?
Wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to redesign the 4S with a lightning connector…
The whole thrust of my argument is that Apple would redesign the mid-priced model currently occupied by the 4S, and based on the 5.
Okay, so… why can't that just BE the iPhone 5? They just got over this move to a larger screen; you're saying keep 66% small screen models instead of moving to 66% larger screen models?
Apple probably doesn't give a hoot about the rumours. It keeps the brand in the news --- free advertising, and doesn't give anything away. In fact it wouldn't surprise me that they might "seed" the mill with intentional "leaks".
3G: added 3G
3GS: Added much faster processor than 3G (which was the same processor as the original iPhone)
4: added Retina Display, camera flash and significantly faster processor
4S: added pseudo 4G
5: added true 4G LTE and a 4" retina display plus lightning
So where's the compelling reason to buy the next gen phone, rather than the then mid-priced 5?
I will be due for another upgrade by then, and a processor upgrade won't do it. Better cameras? The 5 is already state of the art. NFC? Where would I use it? No I don't work at Apple, and I'm sure they will come up with something I can't possibly imagine, the question is whether I will NEED it with the major features unchanged.
Now the then bottom tier 4S, I understand. It doesn't have true 4G LTE. It also has a smaller screen and a slower processor, and no lightning. And they're going to sell me that for free. But the 5 and the next gen flagship, will be mostly identical. What could possibly justify $100 difference? A faster processor? Doubtful for most at the speeds the processors currently run (it was much more of an issue between the 3G & 3GS).
Then we get to the next update, two generations out. The 5 sits on the bottom rung, the mostly identical successor in the mid-price, the latest generation on top. They all have 4G LTE (I doubt there will be a new cellular standard being implemented by then). They all have 16:9 4" retina displays. They all have top of the line cameras. They all have lightning. The only significant differences are going to be processors. Maybe the flagship has a modified design. And some will pay for that alone. But unlike most past generations, the processor is about the only major thing that sets them apart in the future.
But wouldn't it make more sense to have two distinct models? A mini that justifies the lower cost, and the flagship that at least gives you more screen space for the money as well as the latest bells and whistles? The "mini" then becomes the iPhone that gets last years model bumped down to the low-end free position, while the updated mini stays in the mid-range, clearly distinguishable from the flagship. Apple doesn't have to push the style envelope on this model either, with fewer "revolutionary" updates, allowing them to focus on keeping the flagship model unique and highly desirable.
Originally Posted by Mac_128
Processor upgrades may well justify a new phone for some. It doesn't for me and many others, including critics who review each update.
You're joking, right?
3G: added 3G
3GS: Added much faster processor than 3G (which was the same processor as the original iPhone)
4: added Retina Display, camera flash and significantly faster processor
4S: added pseudo 4G
5: added true 4G LTE and a 4" retina display plus lightning
So how is this a "valid update" under your system? Notice the 4S also updated every single other hardware aspect of the phone, but you've glossed over that. It had a significantly faster processor, as did the iPhone 5, but you glossed over that, too.
So where's the compelling reason to buy the next gen phone, rather than the then mid-priced 5?
So don't buy it. Pretend whatever you want to pretend, but you're just outright wrong. This is how hardware updates work, and always have, with computing devices. Where's the compelling reason to buy any computer model except the very first with a new case design? That's basically your argument, and it shows a lot about why it's faulty.
But the 5 and the next gen flagship, will be mostly identical.
They'll be "mostly identical" in the same way the iPhone 4 and 4S were "mostly identical": in that they're not at all identical.
What could possibly justify $100 difference?
What justified it between the 4 and 4S? The 3 and 3GS?
(I doubt there will be a new cellular standard being implemented by then)
No, but there will be faster LTE chips. There will be faster LTE for the next iPhone LTE-A tops out at, what was it, 100 MBps? That's a capital B. No idea if it's right; but something like that.
But unlike most past generations, the processor is about the only major thing that sets them apart in the future.
Really? You can't think of anything at all that would… *sigh* Never mind.
But wouldn't it make more sense to have two distinct models?
Only if they have identical hardware, but that doesn't seem to be Apple's game.
Reuters has published a revised report.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-dismisses-cheaper-iphone-story-114045693.html
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - In a revised version of an interview published Thursday in a Chinese newspaper, Apple Inc marketing chief Phil Schiller said the company would focus on making "the best products" for customers and "never blindly pursue market share."
On Thursday, the Shanghai Evening News cited Schiller as saying that Apple would not develop a cheaper smartphone for the sake of expanding its market share.
That appeared to undermine other recent media reports indicating that Apple was working on a low-end smartphone, which would represent a significant shift in strategy for a company that has always focused on premium products.
But in a new version of the story published after the original, the Shanghai Evening News removed all references to cheaper smartphones, except for a mention of a "cheaper, low-end product." It also amended its original headline from "Apple will not push a cheaper smartphone for the sake of market share," to "Apple wants to provide the best products, will not blindly pursue market share."
Apple confirmed the interview had taken place and that it had contacted the Chinese newspaper about amending its original article, but had no further comment and declined to provide a transcript of the interview.
It was not clear if Schiller had made his original comments or if the newspaper had quoted him out of context.
The Shanghai Evening News could not be immediately reached for comment around 2:00 a.m. Shanghai time Saturday.
"We will not discuss plans for any future products," Schiller was cited as saying in a newly published quote.
The executive had originally been quoted as saying that developing a cheaper smartphone to try and replace feature phones was not a direction in which the company wanted to head. That comment was removed from the new version of the story, which now cites Schiller as saying, "Apple has always focused on providing the best products for its consumers, we've never blindly chased market share."
Apple rarely addresses rumors about upcoming products, which often spur intense speculation. Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal cited anonymous sources as saying Apple could release a cheaper iPhone as early as this year.
(Reporting by Edwin Chan; Editing by Bernadette Baum)
High profile bogus Apple rumors have a fairly well-known cast of perpetrators. Wasn't Gene Munster the first to pipe up on this one?